And in the absolute amount of money and the goods and services that can be bought with it, American poor are much richer than most people in some third world countries, and even some "second world" countries. Those children do better than American children academically - but if a study is conducted it might (or not) so happen that children of "relatively" rich people within that country do better than those of relatively poor people.
By "fighting pov", you can't turn the US into Lake Wobegon - where everyone can be above average financially.
This study doesn't necessarily correlate the absolute amount of money (or the goods and services that can be bought with it) with academic performance, the correlation could be with relative values also. Lack of correlation with absolute values is easily seen by comparing children across countries - which is some evidence for the correlation being with relative values of prosperity.
It says that as well, but the main thrust of the post is that rotation is useful within the password security model, since passwords require secrecy and rotation restores it, but that rotation does not do anything useful for biometrics, because their security -- to the degree that they have it -- is based on the integrity of the acquisition process, not secrecy.
Yeah, there you just hand-waved it away. The actual secret is the electronic data that goes to the machine - that is secret whatever you say and that is all that matters. Whether that is secret due to the physical machine ensuring an alive human at the other end, or due to Bruce Lee protecting the machine from attackers showing a JPEG of someone's fingerprint. And whether or not the geometry of one's fingerprint is really secret or not. No one cares.
The data, or the process to convert a finger-print geometry into data are the real secrets here. As soon as leaked, it would be comforting to be able to change one's fingerprints.
India is conducting the largest experiment ever in fingerprint authentication security - attacks with fixed fingerprint data have already been made, and thwarted. It is unknown whether the attackers stored the data that a fingerprint machine generates, or whether they stored the fingerprint geometry in, say, an image. They were thwarted because exact same data was used for lots of authentication requests - whereas in actual fingerprint scanning the data would subtly change every time due to different angles presented to the machine.
It is also unknown whether there were any attacks that were not thwarted - Indian government authorities are not really paragons of transparency.
Ok, read your blog post*, does not give any evidence for it being irrelevant. Your blog post says security of fingerprint authentication depends on the value of the thing being secured. Here, the AC's post as well as TFA does not specify any particular value of the value of the thing being secured - so it could be anything. So statements about fingerprint security being good could be "this crap again" depending on the value of the thing being secured - and inability to change it is definitely not irrelevant.
* The blog post is too dumbed down for the title as well as the subtitle of the blog. Not that non-geeky people couldn't find it useful, but I was trapped into a boring read due to the title. Could you rename it to divenongeekystuff (geekier stuff for non-geeks) ?
Also, not sure what you are going for with 1:365.2425, but 2 people are said to have different birthdays if they self-report with different values out of 366 possible values. Even there, it is more like 365 - the people I know with birthday 29 Feb generally self-report with a birthday of 1 Mar. I guess for fear of missing a party about 75% of years.
So you authenticate to your phone, and your phone authenticates to the "app", which is a website. An unauthorized person needs to break only one of these authentications. This approach doubles the variety of the possible attack vectors.
1) Buy from a steel company and test a statistically appropriate number of samples 2) Build and operate your own foundry and test a statistically appropriate number of samples
If the steel company is labelling its steel, it needs to test. The buyer also needs to test. You make it sound like the work is equal, but the testing is going on twice in the outsourcing case.
Of course, outsourcing + in house testing can still be cheaper. But some work is repeated due to trust issues.
Your statement : The fact remains that the relationship between Puerto Rico and the federal government is fundamentally different than the relationship between any US state and the federal government. Therefore, it is perfectly legitimate for the federal government to treat Puerto Rico differently from any state when it comes to disaster relief or rebuilding after a disaster.
My response : Can you show where I said they "cannot" ? Does it imply anywhere that US citizens are "obligated" to rebuild Florida but not Puerto Rico, except in your putrid imagination ?
And right there, you have the justification for why the federal government can treat Puerto Rico different from Florida
Can you show where I said they "cannot" ? Does it imply anywhere that US citizens are "obligated" to rebuild Florida but not Puerto Rico, except in your putrid imagination ?
Your statement "As an American, I am not a citizen of Puerto Rico. Why do you think I am obligated to pay for the rebuilding of Puerto Rico?" still remains utter nonsense - as applicable to Florida as to Puerto Rico.
Florida is not a territory or a nation, hence you cannot be a "citizen" of it
So you don't know about state citizenship concept in the US ?
at least not in the same sense that you can be a citizen of the US or of Puerto Rico
You can't be a "citizen" of the United States in the same sense that you can be a citizen of Puerto Rico. Which is different from the sense one can be a citizen of the United Kingdom. Every citizenship is different - entailing different rights, duties and values.
If you try to base an argument on using the term "citizen" this way in two different ways, then you are committing the fallacy of equivocation.
Amazing! Pot, kettle, black ? Consider your words "As an American, I am not a citizen of Puerto Rico. "
American : Only the third definition is about a person and the nation United States. (Others are about the language and the persons+continents). This definition defines "American" also as "U. S. citizen". So put together, your statement becomes :
"As a U. S. citizen, I am not a citizen of Puerto Rico"
I've been looking into randomly generating new faces, but that is turning out to be difficult. There are a few elements I can generate - but the face space of the resulting set is merely a million or so faces that are not clearly artificial.
We need to get this work automated so that various figments of the script's imagination can interact with each other independently of us.
Ok, you seem to be under the impression that you said :
As an American, I am ^Wcannot become a citizen of Puerto Rico by moving there. Why do you think I am obligated to pay for the rebuilding of Puerto Rico?
But you didn't say this. You said the following:
As an American, I am not a citizen of Puerto Rico. Why do you think I am obligated to pay for the rebuilding of Puerto Rico?
Which is perfectly valid when Puerto Rico is replaced by Florida.
Yet, your statement is equally applicable to Florida. So tell me, "Most Americans are not citizens of Florida. Why does Floridans get central/union government aid in the event of a disaster ?"
Yeah, instead on learning about the subject matter, conducting research on it, teaching it to others, and contributing to the Wikipedia, they are searching desperately on/. for this advisement. Thank you kindly.
Sometimes you can help by not sitting on the sidelines but actually contributing but you refuse to do so, just claim your expertise in meta discussions. Convenient.
1. The thing is that almost no sex worker is ever "trafficked". 2. There was a problem in Ontario Canada with gangs bringing in girls from other countries and forcing them into stripping and prostitution. Same in Montreal
Which one of these do you think is more verifiable, almost amounting to evidence in itself?
Do you have some source for explaining the benefits from writing software in object-oriented form ? The sources I find and the people I talk to all appear to promote OOP only as a cult - the benefits all seem to be imaginary.
I am open to there being benefits, only the ones I can relate to are all trivial. I have programmed for decades in C, some lisps, a lot of Java, perl, python.
Slashdot Mirror
And in the absolute amount of money and the goods and services that can be bought with it, American poor are much richer than most people in some third world countries, and even some "second world" countries. Those children do better than American children academically - but if a study is conducted it might (or not) so happen that children of "relatively" rich people within that country do better than those of relatively poor people.
By "fighting pov", you can't turn the US into Lake Wobegon - where everyone can be above average financially.
This study doesn't necessarily correlate the absolute amount of money (or the goods and services that can be bought with it) with academic performance, the correlation could be with relative values also. Lack of correlation with absolute values is easily seen by comparing children across countries - which is some evidence for the correlation being with relative values of prosperity.
It says that as well, but the main thrust of the post is that rotation is useful within the password security model, since passwords require secrecy and rotation restores it, but that rotation does not do anything useful for biometrics, because their security -- to the degree that they have it -- is based on the integrity of the acquisition process, not secrecy.
Yeah, there you just hand-waved it away. The actual secret is the electronic data that goes to the machine - that is secret whatever you say and that is all that matters. Whether that is secret due to the physical machine ensuring an alive human at the other end, or due to Bruce Lee protecting the machine from attackers showing a JPEG of someone's fingerprint. And whether or not the geometry of one's fingerprint is really secret or not. No one cares.
The data, or the process to convert a finger-print geometry into data are the real secrets here. As soon as leaked, it would be comforting to be able to change one's fingerprints.
India is conducting the largest experiment ever in fingerprint authentication security - attacks with fixed fingerprint data have already been made, and thwarted. It is unknown whether the attackers stored the data that a fingerprint machine generates, or whether they stored the fingerprint geometry in, say, an image. They were thwarted because exact same data was used for lots of authentication requests - whereas in actual fingerprint scanning the data would subtly change every time due to different angles presented to the machine.
It is also unknown whether there were any attacks that were not thwarted - Indian government authorities are not really paragons of transparency.
Yeah, lord C-3PO hasn't issued any guidance in that regard yet, so I don't know how to feel.
Ok, read your blog post*, does not give any evidence for it being irrelevant. Your blog post says security of fingerprint authentication depends on the value of the thing being secured. Here, the AC's post as well as TFA does not specify any particular value of the value of the thing being secured - so it could be anything. So statements about fingerprint security being good could be "this crap again" depending on the value of the thing being secured - and inability to change it is definitely not irrelevant.
* The blog post is too dumbed down for the title as well as the subtitle of the blog. Not that non-geeky people couldn't find it useful, but I was trapped into a boring read due to the title. Could you rename it to divenongeekystuff (geekier stuff for non-geeks) ?
Also, not sure what you are going for with 1:365.2425, but 2 people are said to have different birthdays if they self-report with different values out of 366 possible values. Even there, it is more like 365 - the people I know with birthday 29 Feb generally self-report with a birthday of 1 Mar. I guess for fear of missing a party about 75% of years.
So you authenticate to your phone, and your phone authenticates to the "app", which is a website. An unauthorized person needs to break only one of these authentications. This approach doubles the variety of the possible attack vectors.
Robots building robots? How perverse !
Your good options are:
1) Buy from a steel company and test a statistically appropriate number of samples
2) Build and operate your own foundry and test a statistically appropriate number of samples
If the steel company is labelling its steel, it needs to test. The buyer also needs to test. You make it sound like the work is equal, but the testing is going on twice in the outsourcing case.
Of course, outsourcing + in house testing can still be cheaper. But some work is repeated due to trust issues.
OK, so you realized your non-argument won't work ? Took you a while.
You are too smart to not know many many exploits, so the question must be rhetorical. What is the real question?
So? How does it imply that US citizens are "obligated" to rebuild Florida but not Puerto Rico ?
Your statement : The fact remains that the relationship between Puerto Rico and the federal government is fundamentally different than the relationship between any US state and the federal government. Therefore, it is perfectly legitimate for the federal government to treat Puerto Rico differently from any state when it comes to disaster relief or rebuilding after a disaster.
My response : Can you show where I said they "cannot" ? Does it imply anywhere that US citizens are "obligated" to rebuild Florida but not Puerto Rico, except in your putrid imagination ?
And right there, you have the justification for why the federal government can treat Puerto Rico different from Florida
Can you show where I said they "cannot" ? Does it imply anywhere that US citizens are "obligated" to rebuild Florida but not Puerto Rico, except in your putrid imagination ?
Your statement "As an American, I am not a citizen of Puerto Rico. Why do you think I am obligated to pay for the rebuilding of Puerto Rico?" still remains utter nonsense - as applicable to Florida as to Puerto Rico.
Florida is not a territory or a nation, hence you cannot be a "citizen" of it
So you don't know about state citizenship concept in the US ?
at least not in the same sense that you can be a citizen of the US or of Puerto Rico
You can't be a "citizen" of the United States in the same sense that you can be a citizen of Puerto Rico. Which is different from the sense one can be a citizen of the United Kingdom. Every citizenship is different - entailing different rights, duties and values.
If you try to base an argument on using the term "citizen" this way in two different ways, then you are committing the fallacy of equivocation.
Amazing! Pot, kettle, black ? Consider your words "As an American, I am not a citizen of Puerto Rico. "
American : Only the third definition is about a person and the nation United States. (Others are about the language and the persons+continents). This definition defines "American" also as "U. S. citizen". So put together, your statement becomes :
"As a U. S. citizen, I am not a citizen of Puerto Rico"
Which is the identical fallacy you named.
I've been looking into randomly generating new faces, but that is turning out to be difficult. There are a few elements I can generate - but the face space of the resulting set is merely a million or so faces that are not clearly artificial.
We need to get this work automated so that various figments of the script's imagination can interact with each other independently of us.
Ok, you seem to be under the impression that you said :
As an American, I am ^W cannot become a citizen of Puerto Rico by moving there. Why do you think I am obligated to pay for the rebuilding of Puerto Rico?
But you didn't say this. You said the following :
As an American, I am not a citizen of Puerto Rico. Why do you think I am obligated to pay for the rebuilding of Puerto Rico?
Which is perfectly valid when Puerto Rico is replaced by Florida.
So they are being conditioned to obey a unconvincing 2-dimensional recording of you ? You don't see how that can go wrong ?
Yet, your statement is equally applicable to Florida. So tell me, "Most Americans are not citizens of Florida. Why does Floridans get central/union government aid in the event of a disaster ?"
As an American, I am not a citizen of Puerto Rico. Why do you think I am obligated to pay for the rebuilding of Puerto Rico?
Most Americans are not citizens of Florida. Why does Floridans get central/union government aid in the event of a disaster ?
Yeah, instead on learning about the subject matter, conducting research on it, teaching it to others, and contributing to the Wikipedia, they are searching desperately on /. for this advisement. Thank you kindly.
I haven't edited any.
Sometimes you can help by not sitting on the sidelines but actually contributing but you refuse to do so, just claim your expertise in meta discussions. Convenient.
1. The thing is that almost no sex worker is ever "trafficked".
2. There was a problem in Ontario Canada with gangs bringing in girls from other countries and forcing them into stripping and prostitution. Same in Montreal
Which one of these do you think is more verifiable, almost amounting to evidence in itself?
The one thing that is impossible in the field of IT security is the consumers waking up. Everything else is possible.
I am not a teacher.
Yep. You got Wikipedia services for free, you got more than your money's worth , but you choose to complain instead of helping. Kudos.
Do you have some source for explaining the benefits from writing software in object-oriented form ? The sources I find and the people I talk to all appear to promote OOP only as a cult - the benefits all seem to be imaginary.
I am open to there being benefits, only the ones I can relate to are all trivial. I have programmed for decades in C, some lisps, a lot of Java, perl, python.